From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-x231.google.com (mail-qg0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89D5321F1E6 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 11:45:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id i50so1226992qgf.36 for ; Tue, 01 Apr 2014 11:45:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=AUTW+Crf7P9CG5SwdatkHbvaZkinKfDm1uim6Lox0fg=; b=tI5St3vz/YI4ukU2zDqPGCb7EWE4mpUm7NSyjRZGac6f8CR5OQcZHACZnSz6BZB3F9 6R/LMr9MA1s0wA2bxGrtvV8w0Hvjj+rXPhSmB64uqJjBObJ5H0bgLzL4vdUckGMsa8g9 p/GwoqGAsLUuBiZykfr4pUmHiMii44CgPgiXK2kj744/MNkpMh2Ee8fNUfzjsMml0RQr DKrD2xYc/dR32PN7IBEh9h15BgfZZ1aDUHUpZJ5HcXwunK/IddgaPe4G9KsS8Ch/qPV3 Djtl5Rwx8qfBDeesqhxytqO+Y9X6TiEU5n+3FpQV9z02Ry0ZZv/IArNx2cOtNM6ZGF6g k9yw== X-Received: by 10.140.22.197 with SMTP id 63mr4311193qgn.4.1396377943181; Tue, 01 Apr 2014 11:45:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from richs-mbp-4119.home.lan ([72.92.159.197]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id b3sm36337595qae.2.2014.04.01.11.45.40 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 01 Apr 2014 11:45:42 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Rich Brown In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 14:45:39 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <6F81B5BF-B7CC-40B7-9793-FCF62B735881@gmail.com> References: To: cerowrt-devel X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] Definitional Jiu-jitsu (was Re: 3.10.32-12 results on Free.fr) X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 18:45:44 -0000 On Apr 1, 2014, at 2:21 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > One thing I've noticed is the academic community is now seemingly = defining > "bufferbloat" as something that happens with > 200ms induced queuing > delay delay, where I (we) define it as "excessive queueing", and in > this group, are "settling" for <20ms delay in both directions in most > cases.=20 Hmmm... The academic community has finally come to understand the = concept, and use the name "bufferbloat". Maybe that's OK, even if their = understanding is dramatically different from ours. Perhaps this is an opportunity to let their momentum fully embrace the = Brobdignagian notion that 200 msec is OK, while we pivot agilely to use = something like "smarterqueue.net" to define the "real good" scheme?=20 I'm not sure we have the gravitas to pull this off, but it's worth = considering.=20 Rich PS I can envision the soundtrack in the Youtube video... ... (stirring music) ... ... =46rom the team that conquered Bufferbloat... ... Comes a technique that smashes it by an order of magnitude... ... (trumpets)...=20 A fitting idea for a fitting day :-)